College Basketball 2010-11

[snoodmonger]

So Gary Parrish is at the press conference where they're discussing the 96 team expansion. His tweets have been interesting.

 

 

Now talking tournament expansion. Decision coming by July 31. But they're certainly trying to sell the idea of 96.

 

John Feinstein has put Greg Shaheen on blast in press conference. This is getting interesting.

 

Shaheen did his best, but he can't defend this 96-team mess. He literally wouldn't answer Feinstein's question b/c there was no good answer.

 

In the 96-team field a one seed that keeps advancing will play Saturday-Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday to get to the Final Four.

 

So Feinstein asked if that means the players will miss the entire week of school in that 2nd week. Clearly, they will.

 

But Shaheen couldn't bring himself to say the words. He just sat there in silence b/c he couldn't say the whole week would be missed.

 

It was weird and awkward, and credit Feinstein for repeating the question several times. Shaheen acting like he didn't understand ...

 

what Feinstein was asking. But everybody else in the room understood. Just a weird moment. He couldn't defend the schedule at all.

 

There is no answer to that question that doesn't include the words "they will miss the whole week of classes." So Shaheen just stayed quiet

 

So opening round would be Th-Fri, 1st Sat-Sun, 2nd Tue-Wd, 16 Th-Fri, 8 Sat-Sun, 4 Sat, Champ Monday?

 

The truth is that expansion is a money grab. But the NCAA can't say that b/c, you know, it's not a business. Puts Shaheen in bad spot.

[NCCubFan]

Any university President that would vote in favor of a plan that would require missing an entire week of class on top of what they already miss during the regular season needs to be fired on the spot without receiving a penny of severence pay. That option shouldn't even be on the table for discussion.

[bukie]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

[NCCubFan]

Former Texas Tech coach James Dickey is the new coach for Houston. Dickey was fired by Tech in 2001 and replaced by Robert Montgomery Knight.

[chuckywang]

So Gary Parrish is at the press conference where they're discussing the 96 team expansion. His tweets have been interesting.

 

 

Now talking tournament expansion. Decision coming by July 31. But they're certainly trying to sell the idea of 96.

 

John Feinstein has put Greg Shaheen on blast in press conference. This is getting interesting.

 

Shaheen did his best, but he can't defend this 96-team mess. He literally wouldn't answer Feinstein's question b/c there was no good answer.

 

In the 96-team field a one seed that keeps advancing will play Saturday-Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday to get to the Final Four.

 

So Feinstein asked if that means the players will miss the entire week of school in that 2nd week. Clearly, they will.

 

But Shaheen couldn't bring himself to say the words. He just sat there in silence b/c he couldn't say the whole week would be missed.

 

It was weird and awkward, and credit Feinstein for repeating the question several times. Shaheen acting like he didn't understand ...

 

what Feinstein was asking. But everybody else in the room understood. Just a weird moment. He couldn't defend the schedule at all.

 

There is no answer to that question that doesn't include the words "they will miss the whole week of classes." So Shaheen just stayed quiet

 

So opening round would be Th-Fri, 1st Sat-Sun, 2nd Tue-Wd, 16 Th-Fri, 8 Sat-Sun, 4 Sat, Champ Monday?

 

The truth is that expansion is a money grab. But the NCAA can't say that b/c, you know, it's not a business. Puts Shaheen in bad spot.

 

I don't get this. Currently the two opening round teams will be missing classes as well, and nobody seems to be complaining about that. So why is it ok for those two teams to miss classes but not ok for the other 30 teams?

[hawkeyecub]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

 

That's what I thought they would do also but they're concerned with logistics. The selection show will still be Sunday night so that would leave 40 hours between the announcement of your opponent/location and your game for those playing on Tuesday.

 

I don't know that I can recall a situation like this where everyone in the media and fans almost universally thought it was a terrible idea but basically conceded that it's inevitable. If you can't leave it, just go to 68 and have 4 play-in games for the 12 seeds.

[chuckywang]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

 

That's what I thought they would do also but they're concerned with logistics. The selection show will still be Sunday night so that would leave 40 hours between the announcement of your opponent/location and your game for those playing on Tuesday.

 

I don't know that I can recall a situation like this where everyone in the media and fans almost universally thought it was a terrible idea but basically conceded that it's inevitable. If you can't leave it, just go to 68 and have 4 play-in games for the 12 seeds.

 

I agree with this, even though deciding to give them the 12-seed is kinda arbitrary, and is not really fair to the 5-seeds. But I do like the idea that the last 8 at-large bids play for the last 4 spots. Make the teams that didn't earn their spot into the tourney play for the right to be in it.

[NCCubFan]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

 

That's what I thought they would do also but they're concerned with logistics. The selection show will still be Sunday night so that would leave 40 hours between the announcement of your opponent/location and your game for those playing on Tuesday.

 

I don't know that I can recall a situation like this where everyone in the media and fans almost universally thought it was a terrible idea but basically conceded that it's inevitable. If you can't leave it, just go to 68 and have 4 play-in games for the 12 seeds.

 

I agree with this, even though deciding to give them the 12-seed is kinda arbitrary, and is not really fair to the 5-seeds. But I do like the idea that the last 8 at-large bids play for the last 4 spots. Make the teams that didn't earn their spot into the tourney play for the right to be in it.

I'm guessing he meant to say 16 seeds. It makes no sense to have play-in games for anything other than the lowest seeds.

[Guest]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

 

That's what I thought they would do also but they're concerned with logistics. The selection show will still be Sunday night so that would leave 40 hours between the announcement of your opponent/location and your game for those playing on Tuesday.

 

I don't know that I can recall a situation like this where everyone in the media and fans almost universally thought it was a terrible idea but basically conceded that it's inevitable. If you can't leave it, just go to 68 and have 4 play-in games for the 12 seeds.

 

I agree with this, even though deciding to give them the 12-seed is kinda arbitrary, and is not really fair to the 5-seeds. But I do like the idea that the last 8 at-large bids play for the last 4 spots. Make the teams that didn't earn their spot into the tourney play for the right to be in it.

I'm guessing he meant to say 16 seeds. It makes no sense to have play-in games for anything other than the lowest seeds.

 

It makes plenty of sense. Why make the 16 seeds do play-in games rather than the at-large teams? I think it's much more fair to make two large schools play a Tuesday game for the right to play a 4 or 5 seed rather than two 16 seeds.

[TheVolCub08]

Haven't looked back to see what, if any, discussion was taking place around Kentucky likely losing Dodson and Hood, as well as the expected departures of everyone else. It's entirely possible that Cal only brings back 3 or 4 players next season.

 

His APR hit in 2012 will just be brutal.

[Guest]

Haven't looked back to see what, if any, discussion was taking place around Kentucky likely losing Dodson and Hood, as well as the expected departures of everyone else. It's entirely possible that Cal only brings back 3 or 4 players next season.

 

His APR hit in 2012 will just be brutal.

 

Ehh, he'll probably be gone by 2012.

[hawkeyecub]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

 

That's what I thought they would do also but they're concerned with logistics. The selection show will still be Sunday night so that would leave 40 hours between the announcement of your opponent/location and your game for those playing on Tuesday.

 

I don't know that I can recall a situation like this where everyone in the media and fans almost universally thought it was a terrible idea but basically conceded that it's inevitable. If you can't leave it, just go to 68 and have 4 play-in games for the 12 seeds.

 

I agree with this, even though deciding to give them the 12-seed is kinda arbitrary, and is not really fair to the 5-seeds. But I do like the idea that the last 8 at-large bids play for the last 4 spots. Make the teams that didn't earn their spot into the tourney play for the right to be in it.

I'm guessing he meant to say 16 seeds. It makes no sense to have play-in games for anything other than the lowest seeds.

 

No I meant to say 12 seeds. If you're talking about the last 4 at-large seeds, that's about where they should be.

[cubsfan5150]

Really, if you're going to expand, why not just do the opening round Tuesday-Wednesday of the first week? Three rounds the first week, and then you're right back on schedule. Or, heck, start a week earlier and do just the opening round, while the bye teams have the opening weekend "off".

 

That's what I thought they would do also but they're concerned with logistics. The selection show will still be Sunday night so that would leave 40 hours between the announcement of your opponent/location and your game for those playing on Tuesday.

 

I don't know that I can recall a situation like this where everyone in the media and fans almost universally thought it was a terrible idea but basically conceded that it's inevitable. If you can't leave it, just go to 68 and have 4 play-in games for the 12 seeds.

 

I agree with this, even though deciding to give them the 12-seed is kinda arbitrary, and is not really fair to the 5-seeds. But I do like the idea that the last 8 at-large bids play for the last 4 spots. Make the teams that didn't earn their spot into the tourney play for the right to be in it.

I'm guessing he meant to say 16 seeds. It makes no sense to have play-in games for anything other than the lowest seeds.

 

No I meant to say 12 seeds. If you're talking about the last 4 at-large seeds, that's about where they should be.

 

Exactly, you aren't going to have the 1 seed play Florida in the first round.

[fromthestretch]

Not that I was worried about him leaving, but Painter just signed an eight-year deal with Purdue.

[SouthSideRyan]

Haven't looked back to see what, if any, discussion was taking place around Kentucky likely losing Dodson and Hood, as well as the expected departures of everyone else. It's entirely possible that Cal only brings back 3 or 4 players next season.

 

His APR hit in 2012 will just be brutal.

 

Ehh, he'll probably be gone by 2012.

 

So will his wins

[SouthSideRyan]

Haven't looked back to see what, if any, discussion was taking place around Kentucky likely losing Dodson and Hood, as well as the expected departures of everyone else. It's entirely possible that Cal only brings back 3 or 4 players next season.

 

His APR hit in 2012 will just be brutal.

 

APR is a joke. UK will just take preemptive scholarship hits next year when they don't have 13.

[TheVolCub08]

Haven't looked back to see what, if any, discussion was taking place around Kentucky likely losing Dodson and Hood, as well as the expected departures of everyone else. It's entirely possible that Cal only brings back 3 or 4 players next season.

 

His APR hit in 2012 will just be brutal.

 

APR is a joke. UK will just take preemptive scholarship hits next year when they don't have 13.

 

I don't think scholarship loss will be the end of it for Kentucky at this rate. I think practice restrictions are the direction they're headed in.

[imb]

i'll tell you one thing, if they expand the tournament field i just can't see myself giving an S about the regular season one bit. CAN YOU SAY WATERED DOWN? who cares about recruiting, there's gonna be 96 teams in the tournament, NOTHING MATTERS ANYMORE.

[UK1679666180]

Haven't looked back to see what, if any, discussion was taking place around Kentucky likely losing Dodson and Hood, as well as the expected departures of everyone else. It's entirely possible that Cal only brings back 3 or 4 players next season.

 

His APR hit in 2012 will just be brutal.

 

 

That's the bad part of building a roster around one and dones. Obviously Calipari can recruit with the best of them as last year's class indicates and he'll bring another top class once everything gets settled with who's leaving and who's staying. With that said, next year's team won't be as strong as this year's squad but once the dust settles, they'll still be pretty damn good.

[Vanilla Ice]

Who do you guys have as your preseason number one?

[bukie]

Who do you guys have as your preseason number one?

Way, way too early to say, pending players leaving for the draft.

 

I think Purdue has a shot if Hummel is healthy at the start of next year.

[bukie]

Not sure where this should go, but Evan Turner won the AP player of the year in a landslide, as only 3 other players got votes. Final tally: Turner 54, Wall 9, Butler (WVU) 1, Harangody 1.

[chuckywang]

Who do you guys have as your preseason number one?

 

Duke, then Butler

[SouthSideRyan]

Who do you guys have as your preseason number one?

 

Michigan St.

[imb]

kentucky fans are craaazy

 

http://twitpic.com/1d93id